ESMA LIBRARY

The ESMA Library contains all ESMA documents. Please use the search and filter options to find specific documents.
452
DOCUMENTS

REFINE YOUR SEARCH

Sections

Type of document

Your filters
Board of Appeal X Corporate Disclosure X Prospectus X Trade Repositories X
Reset all filters

Pages

Date Ref. Title Section Type Download Info Summary Related Documents Translated versions
05/01/2017 2016/1621 2016-1621 ESMA letter to EC on postponement of ESEF RTS , , Letter PDF
87.44 KB
21/12/2016 2016/1668 2016-1668 ESMA feedback statement on ESEF , , Report PDF
6.98 MB
21/12/2016 2016/1682 2016-1682 Press Release on Feedback Statement on ESEF , , , Press Release PDF
225.03 KB
25/03/2020 ESMA32-63-951 Accounting implications of the COVID-19 outbreak on the calculation of expected credit losses in accordance with IFRS 9 , Statement PDF
135.91 KB
01/07/2013 2013/815 Amendment to IAS 19 Employee benefits: Regional market issue Letter PDF
137.01 KB
01/07/2016 2016/1062 Announcement Alternative Performance Measures Guidelines in force Statement PDF
119.56 KB
27/02/2019 BoA D 2019 01, 02, 03 and 04 Appeal by Svenska Handelsbanken AB, Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB, Swedbank A and Nordea Bank Abp against the European Securities and Markets Authority Decision PDF
829.04 KB
04/12/2017 ESMA31-69-163 FORM Application form for CFSC CWG , Reference DOCX
34.73 KB
06/11/2020 ESMA32-65-293 Application form for CFSC CWG , Reference DOCX
35.57 KB
04/12/2015 2015/1408 rev Application form for Corporate Finance Consultative Working Group , Reference DOCX
38.7 KB
05/01/2017 ESMA32-65-67 Application Form for CRSC CWG , Reference DOCX
38.09 KB
09/01/2019 ESMA32-65-97 Application form: Consultative Working Group for ESMA’s Corporate Reporting Standing Committee Reference DOCX
38.2 KB
26/01/2016 BOA 2016 001 BoA 2016- 001 (Decision Kluge v EBA) Decision PDF
196.32 KB
08/10/2019 boa-2019-d-05_decision BOA decision creditreform_rating_ag_vs_eba Decision PDF
922.78 KB
30/11/2018 boa30.18 BoA Decision SEB appeal 30 November 2018 Decision PDF
416.77 KB
18/04/2018 ESMA71-99-969 Board of Appeal Appointments 2018 Press Release PDF
292.64 KB
24/06/2013 BoA 2013-008 Board of Appeal Decision , Decision PDF
242.72 KB
The joint Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities (EBA, ESMA and EIOPA) has published today its decision in an appeal brought by an Estonian company against a decision of the EBA. It concerned the question whether the suitability of the managers of a significant branch of a bank may be a matter within EU law, and not just national law. Allowing the appeal, the Board of Appeal interpreted Directive No. 2006/48/EC consistently with the EBA Guidelines on the assessment of the suitability of members of the management body and key function holders. It came to the conclusion that the “fit and proper” requirement is not restricted to the persons who direct the business of the credit institution. The matter therefore was within the EBA’s powers of investigation. Although the appellant criticised the way in which the EBA dealt with its complaint, the Board of Appeal made it clear that it did not accept that criticism. It considered that the EBA dealt with the complaint in an appropriate manner. The ground on which the appeal was allowed was one of interpretation of the applicable legal provisions. The case was remitted to the EBA to adopt the appropriate decision in accordance with the Board of Appeal’s findings. This is for information only. The decision consists of the signed Decision only. For any enquiries, please contact EIOPA’s Press Office: Anzhelika Mayer Tel.: +49 69 9511 1968
17/07/2014 2014/C1/02 Board of Appeal Decision , Decision PDF
368.94 KB
The Joint Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities (the European Banking Authority, the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority and the European Securities and Markets Authority) published its decision in an appeal brought by SV Capital OÜ, an Estonian company, against a decision of the EBA. This was the second appeal to be considered by the Board of Appeal in this matter between the same parties concerning the question whether the suitability of the managers of a significant branch of a bank raised a question of Union law. Following the Board of Appeal’s affirmative decision of 24 June 2013, the appellant requested the EBA to initiate an investigation against the Estonian and Finnish Financial Supervision Authorities because their alleged failure to take action in respect of individuals in the Estonian branch of Nordea Bank Finland PLC whom it was alleged were not fit and proper persons to be key function holders in the bank. The EBA decided that it would not initiate an investigation.  The Board of Appeal decided that the EBA had been right to raise the matter with the national supervisors, but that having done so, it was entitled to take no further action in the light of their responses. The Board accordingly dismissed the appellant’s appeal against the EBA’s decision.
13/01/2014 BoA 2013-014 Board of Appeal Decision Global Private Rating Company v. ESMA , Decision PDF
361.96 KB
Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities dismisses appeal made by a refused CRA-applicant against ESMA On 10 January 2014, the Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities handed down its decision on an appeal by the appellant, Global Private Rating Company “Standard Rating” Ltd, against the refusal by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) to register it as a credit rating agency. This is the first appeal against a decision by ESMA refusing an applicant registration as a credit rating agency. The Board of Appeal unanimously decided that the appeal should be dismissed, and that ESMA’s refusal decision should be confirmed. It stated that it accepted the appellant’s point that the registration of a credit rating agency by ESMA is a new process, and recognised that the procedures will to an extent take time fully to work out. Nevertheless, because of the responsibilities placed on credit rating agencies and their importance in the financial system generally, it considered that the onus must be on an applicant to satisfy ESMA that the relevant requirements are met. The application and its contents must be very clear, and it is not ESMA’s responsibility as regulator to remedy deficiencies.
29/03/2021 Decision BoA D 2021 02 Board of Appeal of the ESAs- decision on "A" vs ESMA Decision PDF
283 KB

Pages